Paul Kent

I'm just watching NRL 360 and Paul Kent just made a stupid comment in defence of the Raiders. He was asked are the Raiders done for the season? " no he said what would happen if Parra lost Moses or Nathan Brown". Some please tell this flog Moses is currently out and Brown has missed 4 games.

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –


  • Losing players for an extended period and losing them for the season are two different things. I haven't seen it yet, but purely going off your comments I would say if we lost Moses and Brown for the season we would probably be in the same boat as the Raiders right now.

    So far I'm really happy with how we've been able to cover our injuries (& suspensions) this year, it's the benefit we have of fielding a well-balanced team across the park.

    Look at what's happening with Moanly and having all your eggs in one basket. They have the majority of their cap in 4 players and their premiership chances took a serious dive when Turbo's hamstring snapped.

    This season was always going to come down to depth and a bit of luck. Fingers crossed we get a little of both.

    • I don't think we could win the comp with out Moses but we have plenty of cover for brown. 

  • Can't watch Paul Kent. He is just an angry man who brings drama. Always defensive like he is ready to fight. Never positive. 

    • That is comment of the year. I totally agree 

    • Agree totally

    • Yep. I stopped watching him ages ago. 

    • You have nailed it, it's his "thing".

  • But the Raiders are going like busteds anyway. They’re gone because they’re playing shithouse, the injuries just nailed it down

  • I was watching the other night and Kent was being belligerent about something, about refs I think, and the other three panelists counter-argued and Ikin intervened to say "[Kent] you've lost this one". The look on Kent's face was priceless. His whole technique is to just increasingly raise his voice and get more and more shrill and belligerent. The Schtick only works because Ikin moves the conversation on without letting the "no Kent" argument get air time. Kent just finds something to whine about. That's his sad life. 

    • It's not his life it's his Shtick and it probably earns him a conservative 600k a year at least. He is probably a totally different bloke off camera. His entire job is to drum up stories and drama, when you understand that you are less infuriated by the bloke. I put on a totally different persona at work compared with when I'm at home or up at the pub with mates - it's no different. 

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Embers replied to the eggman's discussion Pangai jnr
"Lol nice one hehe "
55 minutes ago
the eggman replied to the eggman's discussion Pangai jnr
"Him and Nathan Brown could job share, play 12 rounds each suspended 12 rounds each. "
1 hour ago
Muttman replied to the eggman's discussion Pangai jnr
"I can't believe the Roosters said no. That doesn't seem like them at all. I wonder who answered the phone at the Roosters that day lol. "
1 hour ago
Muttman replied to Bourbon Man's discussion Lavish treatment afforded to SBW
"Semi wouldn't agree to anything less than top dollar. Money matters to our Semi. "
1 hour ago